Thursday, August 16, 2012

Joe Biden, unchained

We all know that if Joe Biden weren't the incumbent vice president, President Barack Obama would not choose him today to be his running mate for re-election. Biden too often speaks before thinking, leading to such ridiculous controversies as the one touched off when he noted that Mitt Romney's banking policies will metaphorically put people "in chains," thus making human slavery a national political issue for the first time in close to 150 years. And, accordingly, he seldom comes off as ready to assume the presidency.

It's time for Biden to retire to spend more time with his family— he's 69, after all — and for the D's to replace him with one of the party's rising stars. It's not too late.

Posted at 03:59:00 PM

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I think it's a bad idea and it might be too late anyway. Obama's campaign needs to project confidence and a sense that it has everything under control. A late move to replace Biden would show the opposite. Otherwise, I think that the move could have one important upside - anything to get the focus off of Obama is a good thing for his campaign (which is the reverse of the strategy in 2008), and two significant downsides - it lets the Romney campaign hammer away at the chaos in the Obama campaign, and I don't know if I trust Biden to go away quietly. Seriously, isn't there a huge risk that he takes a shot at Obama on the way out? Even if he agrees not to, do you trust him (of all people) to keep his mouth shut? No, I don't like this idea at all. Obama made a risky friend when he chose Biden and it's better to keep him muzzled than kick him out.

"Obama's campaign needs to project confidence and a sense that it has everything under control. A late move to replace Biden would show the opposite."

I agree with above. I don't see how Biden's gaffes are any worse than those made by Romney or any other candidate. Besides, even innocent comments are taken out of context so often, it doesn't matter who makes them.

--On August 13, 2012, I posted the following:
================================================

RE: A STREETCAR NAMED DESIRE

One supremely interesting facet of the presidential race becomes the various match-ups of the four members of the two teams. Allow me to analogize to Tennessee Williams’ play A STREETCAR NAMED DESIRE. Williams wrote GLASS MENAGIERE and STREETCAR to feature the heroine. But when STREETCAR became a movie – the center of gravity completely shifted to the character played by Brando simply because Brando was Brando .Now to the presidential campaign: The focus will be Ryan because Ryan is the only guy with A PLAN i.e. THE KEYS TO THE KINGDOM. Biden in no way has the intellectual or rhetorical wherewithal to make the case against Ryan. Thus the job of going after Ryan will necessarily fall solely on Obama’s shoulders. The press will focus on the President simply because he is the President. They do not want to hear from Axelrod or Wasserman-Schultz or Harry Reid. Traditionally the VP nominee is the attack-dog. But an attack-dog and a sitting president locking horns is "off the scale" interesting.

The only hope would be if Secretary Clinton became the VP nominee. I bet by now that BHO is down on his knees begging. And if this happens Old Joe will suddenly faint, develop a heart problem, and go off to join JJJ for Rest & Recupe. Posted by: JerryB | Monday, August 13, 2012 at 04:13 PM
========================================================

Now if it were not for this post the thought of Joe Biden would never have crossed Zorn’s mind. Just joshing, just joking, and just kidden!

I repost because I find my posts hilarious. More importantly, I repost because if the last paragraph comes true – I will proclaim myself god’s gift to everything. And if my prediction does not come true – I promise I will never mention this again.

I did see one report that BHO did ask Clinton to be the VP nominee. I read another report that Old Joe is taking this weekend off to rest.

I truly don't see how Biden could be kicked off now, for the reasons Greg J. lists. I do think, though, that Biden's fitness to be "one heartbeat away from the presidency" is getting a lot more attention which isn't good for Obama either.

As for the debate, John Heileman (spelling is wrong, I think) of New York or New Yorker magazine, and a liberal, wrote last week, "Holy Moley, get your ringside tickets now," which I found quite amusing.

BC -- It was posted on hot air, not Michelle Malkin's site. And no matter where it was posted, the guy said it on air! (The part about HRC.) Now ... I'm not vouching for Ed Klein at all -- just wanted to at least provide a link as to where that info came from. I like that hot air called it "too good to check," because that's probably the best way to regard that story!

Take the above mentioned SWAG (sans science) one step further and we see that HRC needs to get into this dogfight IF she has any aspirations come 2016.

Assuming that Obama wins, what kind of state will we be? 4 years closer to MediCare insolvency and 20+ Trillion in the hole? SWAGS to be sure, but not that far our of whack. Assuming that this comes true, is it possible that the american citizen might actually wake up and realize that something big has to happen? If the choice is Ryan or a monumental tax increase, guess who gets the nod. And if HRC is left with this kind of scenario to deal with (assuming her aspirations haven't changed), what could she offer that wouldn't alienate her base? More of the same? With Ryan budget clubbing her along the way?

If Romney wins, Ryan has to to have clear, hard core evidence that his plan is working (assuming full implementation under the Romney Admin.) Any weakness would be a bonus for HRC, because she could expoit that weakness to her benefit and make her ascendency to the top a cake walk. What HRC brings is good strong foreign policy. What she doesn't have is a budget, and the budget IS the problem today.

If HRC is smart, she'll be backing off of her state duties and concentrating on monetary policy. For money (specifically the availaibility of it) is everything. Without it, you have no government and how the governemnt gets money will define our government for the next 50 years. It's either through taxation, or strong structural reform.

About "Change of Subject."

"Change of Subject" by Chicago Tribune op-ed columnist Eric Zorn contains observations, reports, tips, referrals and tirades, though not necessarily in that order. Links will tend to expire, so seize the day. For an archive of Zorn's latest Tribune columns click here. An explanation of the title of this blog is here. If you have other questions, suggestions or comments, send e-mail to ericzorn at gmail.com.
More about Eric Zorn

Contributing editor Jessica Reynolds is a 2012 graduate of Loyola University Chicago and is the coordinator of the Tribune's editorial board. She can be reached at jreynolds at tribune.com.